From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=none Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EEBD99 for ; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 06:54:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id D2E2467373; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 15:54:04 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 15:54:04 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Christian Brauner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Jan Kara , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] super: massage wait event mechanism Message-ID: <20231127145404.GA29127@lst.de> References: <20231127-vfs-super-massage-wait-v1-0-9ab277bfd01a@kernel.org> <20231127-vfs-super-massage-wait-v1-1-9ab277bfd01a@kernel.org> <20231127135900.GA24437@lst.de> <20231127-hievt-gespuckt-3db6f8bffb5c@brauner> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231127-hievt-gespuckt-3db6f8bffb5c@brauner> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 03:52:56PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 02:59:00PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Can you explain why you're "massaging" things here? > > Ah, I didn't update my commit message before sending out: > > "We're currently using two separate helpers wait_born() and wait_dead() > when we can just all do it in a single helper super_load_flags(). We're > also acquiring the lock before we check whether this superblock is even > a viable candidate. If it's already dying we don't even need to bother > with the lock." > > Is that alright? Sounds good, but now I need to go back and cross-reference it with what actuall is in the patch :)